ray245 wrote: ↑
Straha wrote: ↑
What, exactly, is your argument? Because as far as I can tell it's "The sequels sure did suck!" which... sure? But that's not a response to anyone but Ralin.
That their criticism is rooted in the same fanboyism that led to the sequel trilogy, mostly notably ROS's flaws.
What does any of this shit mean? What is "fanboyism", "fan bros", etc.? What is all this crap you're talking about?
RLM just didn't like the Prequels for reasons carefully laid out over many videos. I didn't like the Prequels either. I agree with around ~75-80% of the criticisms made by RLM, but I don't agree with everything.
Is it possible for me to not like the Prequels, and also prefer certain traits of the OT, without being a "fanboy" or "fan bros" or whatever? If not, then your terminology is just meaningless insults.
Many people didn't like the Prequels for reasons which are often not quite articulated well, but overlap with sentiments like "we want more locations similar to the OT", "we want more stuff similar to the OT", "we don't like politics", etc. I understand what these criticisms are trying to say, even though I think they are poorly articulated.
When people say "more like the OT", what they REALLY mean is: We don't like the Prequels because they failed to capture a certain, hard-to-define "magic ingredient" in the OT, which, if you ask me, is basically this: A small group of characters with great chemistry who go on cool space adventures together while exchanging quippy dialogue. That's the Star Wars formula. I don't like the Sequels much either, but at least TFA sort of
delivered on this. The opening escape sequence with Finn and Poe showed great chemistry between these two characters, with fun quippy dialogue. (Then inexplicably Poe and Finn were separated for most of the Trilogy, but whatever.)
When people say "we don't like politics" that doesn't mean there can't be any
politics. RLM also likes Star Trek, but Star Trek has some of the best
politics (see Star Trek 6, one of my favorite films). What people mean by "we don't like politics" is that the Prequels implemented politics very poorly, to the extent that it became very boring. Not because politics is inherently boring, but because the Prequels also give us a very rough sketch of a facade
of politics - there's really not much deeper going on other than "Palpatine's manipulating everything offscreen, somehow".
The idea of a Republic decaying into an Empire via an elected Senator turning into a dictator is cool in theory, and in fact is pretty close to what happened in real life with ancient Rome, but the Prequels failed to execute this idea in a compelling manner.
Finally, when people say "we want OT locations" they don't mean we just want Tatooine over and over. They mean we just don't like the blatant overuse of CGI (see Battle of Geonosis) where a screenshot literally becomes indistinguishable from a video game.
Blaming older fans (or any fans really) for anything Disney does is ridiculous. By that logic, we should never give feedback ever to any movie
we don't like, for fear that it may have undesirable consequences for future installments. Who the fuck operates like that? You see a movie you don't like and you criticize it, end of story. Are you saying in like, 2002, after Attack of the Clones came up, (which blatantly sucked) we should have been like "well this sucks
..... but I won't say anything just in case JJ Abrams fucks up further things in the next decade". Jesus Christ, at the time, in the early 2000s, the Prequels came out and people reacted to them. The fact that many people didn't like them is nobody's problem except George Lucas'.
In fact, by your own logic, YOU should immediately stop criticizing the Sequel trilogy, in case by 2035 or something, some future director decides to apply your criticisms and totally fucks it up.